Enjoy free speech while you can

[Pointedstick]

MT, you bring up great points but I feel like there's a substantive difference between political issues that represent how you would prefer society to operate and political issues that represent real roadblocks for you personally attempting to peacefully live the way you'd like.

I'm not talking about issues like immigration, war, and whether Planned Parenthood should receive federal funding. Those things don't affect me directly in the least bit. I tune them out and only think or talk about them when I calculate that I will get more enjoyment out of the topic than I will frustration.

To lay it out concretely, there are two big specific things I would like to be able to do that my government prevents me from doing: carry a firearm for protection of myself and my family, and build a house out of earth. I could move to another state and solve the gun issue, but building a house yourself the way you want it without having to beg like a dog and prostitute yourself before fools is problematic everywhere. It's very different from how permitting and codes worked 40 years ago. Most individuals who build these kinds of houses are scofflaws or live in a small town and know someone on the planning board. The consequences of getting caught are devastating since they can literally force you to tear down your own house.

I could say, "screw it, I'll just buy a contractor-built stick frame house." and then I'd never be hassled. But I don't want to do that. The way the government has set up the planning, zoning, and permitting systems, things like this are illegal by default and you need to prove to bureaucrats why they should make it legal for you.

Perhaps I should get better at schmoozing bureaucrats. Or become very rich. Then I can just pay them a variance fee or whatever and they'll go away.

[moda0306]

PS,

Can't you build a concrete block home?  Is that not enough?  Do we have a thread on this topic because I find whatever you're talking about interesting.

[MediumTex]

Switzerland may be more socialistic than the US, but it is clearly less fascistic.

And there are in fact no opportunities in the US to live a relatively free life, if by that you mean that you:
1. Are not required to comply with immensely complex tax rules that often change to your detriment without notice and
2. Can invest as you wish without interference from the US government.

Not to mention the other aspects I have alluded to previously.

By the way, many of those rules also apply to US citizens wherever they reside in the world, which is unique to so-called "advanced" countries.

Of course, if you are comparing the US to Ukraine or some other third-world hellhole, then it may be better. I don't consider that a valid comparison, though.

But as I mentioned a few posts up, what are we as individuals to do?

Do we spend our lives with the social/cultural/political equivalent of a low grade fever because the human institutions that happen to have been in place in the society we were born into are less than perfect?

The world that we live in, the country that we live in (whichever country that might be), and the government that is in place are all less than perfect, but what is the point of complaining about things over which we have no control when there are so many things that we can control?

Ultimately, no one really cares about one individual's sense of outrage except to the extent that it has some direct bearing on their lives.

Assuming that you are as outraged with the lack of freedom in the U.S. as your posts suggest, what is the point of your outrage?  The way I look at it, the system was screwed up long before I got here and it will be screwed up long after I am gone.  The only people who win at the game of trying to change the system are those who simply enjoy playing the game and realize that they as individuals are unlikely to have much lasting impact on changing its fundamental nature.  There have been countless immensely influential and powerful people in Washington and 20 years after they exit the scene there are virtually no positive changes to be observed that were the direct result of the exercise of their power.  Such people are lucky if anyone even remembers their names. 

Remember Clark Clifford?

Remember Richard Russell?

Remember Wilbur Mills?

Remember Dan Rostenkowski?

These were immensely powerful men of the past whose names few people even remember today. 

What would you advise a person in the U.S. to do who was interested in freedom and living as freely as possible?  Would you suggest that they just stay in a constant state of annoyance at the state of the present system?  What kind of freedom is that?

I would tell a person interested in freedom to go build a business, go start a family, go write a book, go learn to surf, go hang out at a monastery.  Above all, enjoy life by working around the obstacles that stand in the way of his own enjoyment of life and experience of freedom, as opposed to endlessly banging his head against those obstacles.

If that person seeking freedom asked me if they should go to Washington like Jimmy Stewart with the intention of improving society, I would say to the person to do that only if he thinks he will enjoy engaging in endless competition and contention with a huge group of delusional narcissists, but if that doesn't sound satisfying to him he should try spending his limited time and resources in a different way.

I don't think I have ever met a person who was either an elected official or a political activist who seemed to have the vaguest sense of what personal freedom feels like.  Such people usually spend their days in a constant state of insecurity and agitation.  That sort of existence just doesn't make any sense to me.  I'm happy to let such people busy themselves banging their heads against brick walls--it gives them something to do, which should help prevent them from bothering me.

[Pointedstick]

PS,

Can't you build a concrete block home?  Is that not enough?  Do we have a thread on this topic because I find whatever you're talking about interesting.

There's that word "enough." If I'm not hurting anybody else, why should I have to be content with "enough" simply because some guardian bureaucrat is scared of unfamiliarity? Who's it hurting if I exceed his--or your--definition of "enough"? That's the real root of the issue here, IMHO. The idea that people should be content with extrinsic definitions of "enough" even in the absence of demonstrable harms. That is what I fight against.

But if you're interested in natural building and the trials and tribulations at the hands of zoning departments that has had the effect of uniting hippies and survivalists, I'll start a new thread.

[MediumTex]

MT, you bring up great points but I feel like there's a substantive difference between political issues that represent how you would prefer society to operate and political issues that represent real roadblocks for you personally attempting to peacefully live the way you'd like.

I'm not talking about issues like immigration, war, and whether Planned Parenthood should receive federal funding. Those things don't affect me directly in the least bit. I tune them out and only think or talk about them when I calculate that I will get more enjoyment out of the topic than I will frustration.

To lay it out concretely, there are two big specific things I would like to be able to do that my government prevents me from doing: carry a firearm for protection of myself and my family, and build a house out of earth. I could move to another state and solve the gun issue, but building a house yourself the way you want it without having to beg like a dog and prostitute yourself before fools is problematic everywhere. It's very different from how permitting and codes worked 40 years ago. Most individuals who build these kinds of houses are scofflaws or live in a small town and know someone on the planning board. The consequences of getting caught are devastating since they can literally force you to tear down your own house.

I could say, "screw it, I'll just buy a contractor-built stick frame house." and then I'd never be hassled. But I don't want to do that. The way the government has set up the planning, zoning, and permitting systems, things like this are illegal by default and you need to prove to bureaucrats why they should make it legal for you.

Perhaps I should get better at schmoozing bureaucrats. Or become very rich. Then I can just pay them a variance fee or whatever and they'll go away.

Have you ever carried a concealed firearm for any period of time?  I used to have a CHL and carried a gun, but eventually just got bored with it.  It's heavy and there is a lot of liability associated with it.  To me, a better approach is to simply stay out of areas with a lot of crime.  I've never been in a situation where I felt having a concealed firearm would have provided me with a better outcome, though I've been in quite a few situations where a concealed firearm could have made things a lot worse.

As far as building the kind of house you want to build, imagine yourself on your deathbed many decades from now.  The people you love are surrounding you and you are reflecting on your life.  How likely is it that you would say "There was a lot of good stuff, but DAMMIT!, I wasn't able to choose the building materials for my house and that compromise ruined everything else."

I'm not saying that carrying a gun and building the kind of house you want to build aren't important, but if you simply chose to focus on other things over which you had more control do you think that you would feel more or less satisfied?

I used to be upset about all sorts of things that I felt represented limitations on my freedom and liberty, but at some point virtually all of those worries just evaporated as I realized all of the good things in my world that were just waiting to be enjoyed more fully. 

Honestly, I have never felt more free than when I am riding scooters with my kids.  The speed, the competition of racing, the sense of togetherness, the physical workout, and the ability to explore the world at just the right speed are exhilarating to me.  It's as if the wheels on the scooters make it impossible for any cares of the world to stick to me.  It's as close to the rush of surfing as I think you can get on land, and I think it's why kids dig skateboarding so much (which is like scootering, except it's on 4 wheels and you can't steer).

What is the one thing that has ever kept me from experiencing the freedom I am describing above?  It has been sitting around my house pissed off about some big problem with the world that I felt people weren't concerned enough about or doing as much about as I thought they should.

Remember what Anton Chigurh said on a related topic in No Country for Old Men:

"If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?"

[Pointedstick]

It sounds like what you're saying is, "Don't fight city hall. If the government is stopping you from doing what you want, just do something else."

That may be a recipe for contentment, but it doesn't sound very free to me. I mean, if I sold all my firearms, I would be rid of the need to care about the politics of firearms ownership, the risk of arrest or death at the hands of a police officer, the liability if they were stolen or accessed by a child, etc. But then I wouldn't have any firearms, and I want to have firearms. They are a part of my happiness.

I'm sure it's quite possible for Cubans to find a great deal of contentment and happiness scootering with their kids. Heck, even in North Korea they probably won't throw you in a gulag for doing that. But we wouldn't say that those people are free.

None of what you're saying is wrong, but I feel like you've veered into trying to steer people into living happier lives by not caring about infringements on their freedom. To get back to the thread's original topic, living in many non-U.S. countries could be made much safer and happier by simply never saying anything negative about an ethnic minority or a politician. Boom, now there's no risk if you being fined or jailed for "hate speech" or whatever.

But again, that's not freedom.

(BTW, yes, I have carried a concealed firearm for significant lengths of time. Always legally, and out of my home state.)

i would point out there is a big difference between caring about understanding and taking action when you can on the political things you care about and being upset and angry about them, mt seems to be talking as if you cant have one without the other.. his points about detachment and finding freedom are perfectly valid and useful and necessary to disconnect the two, but i don't see why being detached has to equal being apathetic

[moda0306]

Whether resentful hippie libtards, racist conservative "angry white men," or libertarians that feel like they're enslaved, I feel truly bad for anyone stuck in a mental rut, who hasn't found the wisdom in this oft-used saying:

God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.

Luckily, you don't have to be religious in any way/shape/form to appreciate this 100%.  Just like you don't have to be a libertarian to take a ton away from HB's "How I Found Freedom."  A raging Socialist could appreciate it (though it may be more difficult for them to disconnect their will to care for and/or control others)."

People of centuries past would probably kill for the amount of choices we have on a daily basis with which direction we point our lives.  When I see people actively lamenting non-stop in bitter ways about them being harmed in some awful way that they can't control, but have about 50 things they could do in the next week to grab a hold of their lives and make it remarkably better (and others they (supposedly) care most about) it's one of the most painful things to watch.

Not that this is you, Libertarian666... but you do seem a bit distraught about your situation.

[moda0306]

PS,

I wasn't trying to be a dick with that comment... Like "isn't a shotgun enough?"  Not at all what I meant... I really have no idea on this topic so I used "enough" from a functional sense (how should I build a robust home within the bounds of the law), not a sense of what I want the government limiting. 

"Need" should never be a word government uses when talking about our freedoms.  We don't "need" anything but food, water, and shelter.  The discussion should always be around balancing our freedoms with all those other considerations we've talked about 50 times .

[MediumTex]

It sounds like what you're saying is, "Don't fight city hall. If the government is stopping you from doing what you want, just do something else."

What I am saying is that you should only fight City Hall if fighting City Hall is truly the best use of your time and it's what you otherwise enjoy doing (all things considered).  Some people experience what Harry Browne called "a consumption value" from such things (as opposed to "a production value", which is what comes from productive work--a given activity can have elements of both).

That may be a recipe for contentment, but it doesn't sound very free to me. I mean, if I sold all my firearms, I would be rid of the need to care about the politics of firearms ownership, the risk of arrest or death at the hands of a police officer, the liability if they were stolen or accessed by a child, etc. But then I wouldn't have any firearms, and I want to have firearms. They are a part of my happiness.

Everyone's recipe for freedom is different.  I'm not saying that one should settle for contentment over freedom.  I'm just saying that some things in life are more trouble than they are worth.  If taking a position in an oppressive society results in immediate execution, but simply remaining quiet allows one to live my life with little to no harassment, I would likely choose to remain quiet, because that would represent more freedom for me.  Others might readily go to their deaths by speaking out, and I would assume that would represent freedom for them. 

I'm sure it's quite possible for Cubans to find a great deal of contentment and happiness scootering with their kids. Heck, even in North Korea they probably won't throw you in a gulag for doing that. But we wouldn't say that those people are free.

If we agree that freedom is a way of interpreting reality, as opposed to being an objective set of conditions that exist outside of the individual, perhaps those people you cite are very free in the sense that they are having the mental and psychological experience of freedom.  I don't know what the inner world of anyone else is like.  I can speculate, but I would probably be wrong.

None of what you're saying is wrong, but I feel like you've veered into trying to steer people into living happier lives by not caring about infringements on their freedom.

Once again, I'm not talking about not caring about things.  I'm talking about making prudent choices when we are deciding which things we choose to care about.  I would say to anyone that he should care about the things that are important to him, but to make sure that the things he cares about are truly important to him, as opposed to being the things that the TV and internet say he should care about.

Riding scooters with my kids is important to me, even though it probably seems ridiculous to other people.

To get back to the thread's original topic, living in many non-U.S. countries could be made much safer and happier by simply never saying anything negative about an ethnic minority or a politician. Boom, now there's no risk if you being fined or jailed for "hate speech" or whatever.

But again, that's not freedom.

That might not be freedom for you, but who is to say that it's not freedom for someone else? 

What I know is that I see countless people around me every day who seem anything but free and it has nothing to do with anything the government is or isn't doing.  From my perspective, their lack of freedom is entirely self-imposed.  To quote the Eagles:

So often times it happens that we live our lives in chains, and we never even know we have the key.

***

[Sorry to do that response to every single point thing, but I think that you are raising great issues about the points I am trying to make.]

[Pointedstick]

If we agree that freedom is a way of interpreting reality, as opposed to being an objective set of conditions that exist outside of the individual, perhaps those people you cite are very free in the sense that they are having the mental and psychological experience of freedom.  I don't know what the inner world of anyone else is like.  I can speculate, but I would probably be wrong.

This seems like is the meat of our disagreement. I suppose I don't agree that freedom is an entirely internal feeling.

I think part of freedom is casting off your mental shackles, that's very true. And How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World does a magnificent job of showing you how. But I think another part comes from being free from external constraints in the world around you. The more constraints you are subject to, the less leeway you have for mental freedom because you have more and more you need to learn how to feel free from. If you live in total bondage, it's only possible to feel mentally free by being a zen buddhist monk well on the path to enlightenment (paging Dr. Doodle! Come in, Dr. Doodle!).

To me, freedom is both. It's very important that you feel free within the constraints of the society you inhabit, but that shouldn't enable or justify any possible level of external oppression. Freedom from external constraints seems just as important to me as freedom from self-imposed constraints.

Although actually, I think eternal constraints only become limiting once you've become free mentally. You realize that you're not going to stand in your own way anymore and the world is your oyster... until you run up against the external constraints.

Those unfree people you see walking around, enraged at Democrats or Republicans or the Jets or the stock market or their failing marriage or the federal government's response to unrelated foreign conflicts... imagine that all those people managed to become free of their self-imposed negative thoughts and became much more self-actualized.

Let's say they decide to start businesses and raise chickens and design backyard rocket engines and homeschool their kids and enter fields of study or work not traditionally pursued by people of their class or gender.

Don't you think they'd start running into more external constraints?

[moda0306]

PS,

From a personal standpoint, isn't it irrelevant whether the external force to our freedom is another individual, government, or natural laws and a lack of technology to get around those laws?

Because if we're really concerned with ALL external forces against us doing what we want, we're far freer today for the most part than we've ever been.  Even from a gun standpoint... you can carry guns that they would have been drooling over back in 1776.

[KevinW]

From a personal standpoint, isn't it irrelevant whether the external force to our freedom is another individual, government, or natural laws and a lack of technology to get around those laws?

Because if we're really concerned with ALL external forces against us doing what we want, we're far freer today for the most part than we've ever been.  Even from a gun standpoint... you can carry guns that they would have been drooling over back in 1776.

+1

Everything we might want to do has a price attached to it. In some cases the price involves physical or mental effort, money, capital, or physical resources, but it might also involve social capital, personal pride, or emotional effort.

From a libertarian perspective, obstacles originating from government are particularly frustrating since from that perspective they are entirely unnecessary. A communist would feel the same way about obstacles originating from a lack of money or capital. But in practical utilitarian terms, the origin of an obstacle is irrelevant to the price to overcome that obstacle. Either the price is worth paying or it isn't. And by any measure the price to do just about any thing is lower than it's ever been.

If I were you I'd probably suck it up and jump through whatever ridiculous hoops are necessary to build the house you want. It's OK to acknowledge that it's unpleasant, and vent about it, but it's just what you have to do to accomplish your goal. Same thing as chopping onions or changing a diaper. And keep in mind that the total effort necessary to build an earthen house now, even including bureaucratic BS, is still lower than it was hundreds of years ago when we didn't have electricity or pneumatics and commoners were not allowed to own land.

[MediumTex]

This seems like is the meat of our disagreement. I suppose I don't agree that freedom is an entirely internal feeling.

Not to seem too slippery here, but what you are describing is your understanding of freedom.  You are not describing some universally applicable aspect of freedom.  Everyone experiences freedom in their own way.

As KevinW noted above, there will always be external constraints to freedom and this is just part of living in the real world.  Harry Browne defined these constraints as "reality"--i.e., the thing that you bump into when you aren't watching where you are going.

Don't you think they'd start running into more external constraints?

Encountering external constraints is how we know we are alive.  External constraints come in a thousand flavors--engineering, weather, finance, culture, and politics are just a few.

What I am suggesting is that the "de-stupidization" of politics would be just as difficult as imposing human order upon the weather.  The imperfections in human institutions are every bit as much a natural phenomenon flowing from the flaws in human nature as the weather is a phenomenon flowing from a given set of atmospheric conditions.

Humans doing stupid things mixed in with very smart things is not an aberration.  It's part of how you know you are dealing with humans.  Wishing that it was otherwise is IMHO not being realistic about the type of creatures you are dealing with.

[Pointedstick]

Yeah… I guess you guys are right. Seems like I still have more work to do in the "feeling free from government" department.

And to be totally honest here, the first and biggest impediment to my building a house here is money for the land itself, since land in the bay area costs ninety zillion dollars per square foot. I almost bought land in Nevada, but the cost wound up being too high in terms of transportation time to get there while still working in California.

[MediumTex]

Yeah… I guess you guys are right. Seems like I still have more work to do in the "feeling free from government" department.

Although there are comparatively fewer of them to deal with, getting rid of the worms in your brain is IMHO harder than getting rid of the worms out there in the world that give you trouble.

[moda0306]

PS,

I feel you though... I think it's our natural reaction to scarcity that we get far, far more angry when our freedoms are limited by others (or we see man-caused tragedy on TV) than just a simple act of nature or impossibility due to physical laws.  Ie, we are far more angry at the TSA for delaying our flight with BS than we ever would have in 1850 looking at the sky and being angry we couldn't fly.

However, I think that's a flaw more than it's a trait... it causes us to fall into traps where we ignore the 90%-freedom (per HB's calculations) that we have and focus like a beam on the 10% we can't control and makes us miserable to think about.

[Pointedstick]

Haha, you're right!

On the other hand, if we stopped being annoyed by the 10% that's impeding us, I feel like it might never become 9%, or 8%, or even 1%. We got where we are today because impatient and insatiable people were annoyed with the status quo.

Contentedness with the state of the world is great on an individual level, but I feel like there's something to be said for continuing to fight injustice. It took courageous individuals risking their lives and freedom to alleviate the plight of African Americans who faced such terrible discrimination. If none of them had ever stood up and said, "hey, this isn't right!" maybe they'd still be sitting in the back of the bus and drinking at separate water fountains. We oughtn't denigrate the courage required to fight for freedom and say the modern equivalent of, "you should just be content with the world as it exists today. Think about how much better it is now compared to when you would have been a slave!"

[MediumTex]

Haha, you're right!

On the other hand, if we stopped being annoyed by the 10% that's impeding us, I feel like it might never become 9%, or 8%, or even 1%. We got where we are today because impatient and insatiable people were annoyed with the status quo.

Contentedness with the state of the world is great on an individual level, but I feel like there's something to be said for continuing to fight injustice. It took courageous individuals risking their lives and freedom to alleviate the plight of African Americans who faced such terrible discrimination. If none of them had ever stood up and said, "hey, this isn't right!" maybe they'd still be sitting in the back of the bus and drinking at separate water fountains. We oughtn't denigrate the courage required to fight for freedom and say the modern equivalent of, "you should just be content with the world as it exists today. Think about how much better it is now compared to when you would have been a slave!"

It's the energy I saved from not watching the news that gave me the fuel to write the PP book and assist in getting this website going.

There's nothing in what I'm saying that involves passivity.  It's strictly focusing your efforts on productive pursuits.

[RuralEngineer]

MT,

It sounds like you know why the caged bird sings.

PS,

Earth homes are getting more popular. Hopefully some beauraucrat will pull their head out of their ass so you can take advantage. They're pretty awesome.

[MediumTex]

MT,

It sounds like you know why the caged bird sings.

For anyone else who hasn't read it, check it out:

The free bird leaps
on the back of the wind
and floats downstream
till the current ends
and dips his wings
in the orange sun rays
and dares to claim the sky.

But a bird that stalks
down his narrow cage
can seldom see through
his bars of rage
his wings are clipped and
his feet are tied
so he opens his throat to sing.

The caged bird sings
with fearful trill
of the things unknown
but longed for still
and his tune is heard
on the distant hill
for the caged bird
sings of freedom

The free bird thinks of another breeze
and the trade winds soft through the sighing trees
and the fat worms waiting on a dawn-bright lawn
and he names the sky his own.

But a caged bird stands on the grave of dreams
his shadow shouts on a nightmare scream
his wings are clipped and his feet are tied
so he opens his throat to sing

The caged bird sings
with a fearful trill
of things unknown
but longed for still
and his tune is heard
on the distant hill
for the caged bird
sings of freedom.

[MediumTex]

Another freedom jingle that I sort of like is "The Eagle and the Hawk":

I am the eagle, I live in high country
In rocky cathedrals that reach to the sky
I am the hawk and there’s blood on my feathers
But time is still turning they soon will be dry
And all of those who see me, and all who believe in me
Share in the freedom I feel when I fly

Come dance with the west wind and touch on the mountain tops
Sail over the canyons and up to the stars
And reach for the heavens and hope for the future
And all that we can be and not what we are